What if the Lakota-type had been approved for production?

[Mark]

Mikey wrote:
Maybe. I don't recall evidence to confirm or deny that fact.

Earlier in the thread it was mentioned the refit took six months. That means each individual dock can upgrade two a year (maybe more once they get going) A big difference from building a ship from scratch, which takes years.

As effective. I'd still be concerned about the age of some of the spaceframes.

To clarify, more effective than a non-refit Excelsior class. As for the space frames, we're not re-introducing them into long term service. We're upgrading the battlefleet for combat.

Actually, that's when it is a bad idea. Instead of adding a ship to the fleet, you're taking one off the lines for an unspecified - bu no doubt significant - amount of time. That's why the US Army's operation to remanufacture 501 Apaches into Apache Longbows is suspended during wartime.

Well, I can't argue that you'd be taking ships off the line......but doing so would over double it's combat effectiveness. Upgrading a potion of the Excelsior fleet at a time (especially if the ship is out of action for repairs already), would have lent a great deal more firepower to future engagements.

[Captain Seafort]

Well, I can't argue that you'd be taking ships off the line......but doing so would over double it's combat effectiveness. Upgrading a potion of the Excelsior fleet at a time (especially if the ship is out of action for repairs already), would have lent a great deal more firepower to future engagements.

For most of the war Starfleet was more worried about the firepower it needed immediately, not in some future engagement

[Mark]

True, but upgrades increase the survivabilty of the ship, thus keeping better guns in the field longer.

And I never did understand why Starfleet didn't hire mercs to bolster their numbers either.

[Mikey]

Earlier in the thread it was mentioned the refit took six months. That means each individual dock can upgrade two a year (maybe more once they get going) A big difference from building a ship from scratch, which takes years.

OK. Granted.

To clarify, more effective than a non-refit Excelsior class.

Fairy snuff.

As for the space frames, we're not re-introducing them into long term service. We're upgrading the battlefleet for combat.

Quite an investment for a ship that's due to be retired, no?

Well, I can't argue that you'd be taking ships off the line......but doing so would over double it's combat effectiveness. Upgrading a potion of the Excelsior fleet at a time (especially if the ship is out of action for repairs already), would have lent a great deal more firepower to future engagements.

We're talking about the course of a day-to-day war, not building up for a probable future conflict. A ship that's great at some point in the future but is out of action now is worth nothing when it counts... which is now.

[Captain Seafort]

True, but upgrades increase the survivabilty of the ship, thus keeping better guns in the field longer.

They also remove ships from the front line when Starfleet needed every ship they could get their hands on. It's the same reason HMS Warspite bombarded Sword Beach despite one turret being out of action and having to be towed into position - she was needed too badly to finish repairs after she was hit by a Fritz-X off Salerno.

And I never did understand why Starfleet didn't hire mercs to bolster their numbers either.

Maybe someone important had read about Blackwater's antics in a history book.

[Mikey]

It's the same reason HMS Warspite bombarded Sword Beach despite one turret being out of action and having to be towed into position - she was needed too badly to finish repairs after she was hit by a Fritz-X off Salerno.

I thought that was done to maintain Warspite's record of appearing in every single engagement in the war.

Honestly, just ot read the service record, one would have thought that there were 15 different Warspites.

[Deepcrush]

There were two points during the war that the UFP should have pulled the Excelsiors and began refitting them.

First, during the cease fire. Which lasted for several months. They wouldn't have gotten all of them done but a few is better then none.

Second, when the RSE joined the war. There were several months that the allies had gone from retreat to stalemate to offensive. Then again is another point to begin such upgrades.

That being said, as others have covered. When the Dominion was on the offensive, the UFP needed every ship they could get on the front lines.

[Mark]

They found time to upgrade Lakota herself, after all........right?

[Mikey]

Slightly different than wholesale removal of ships from the front.

[Deepcrush]

Plus that was before the war.

[Sionnach Glic]

Indeed. They needed everything they had now, not what they could get in a few months.

[Panzer]

That being said, as others have covered. When the Dominion was on the offensive, the UFP needed every ship they could get on the front lines.

They could have done some/all of the upgrades when ships were pulled from the line for repairs though. If it's out of combat for 2 months because of damage, then they could have done some of the work to make them more combat effective when they return to the line. Adding the QT launchers (while leaving all other combat features the same) while the ship is under repair would make a huge difference in battle once it returns to the lines. Or slapping in some upgrade phasers, or better shields, etc...

Just look at what the US did to it's ships in WWII for example, they always got upgraded while under repair. Look at this for the USS Selfridge: http://www.navsource.org/archives/05/357.htm
Completely changed the weapons layout and command spaces while the bow was rebuilt from torpedo damage.
Or a much earlier war example, the USS Tennessee shortly after Pearl Harbor: http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/43f.htm
The caption for the second picture explains.

So yes, SF needed ships now, but if they are going back for repairs, they should have used the time to upgrade what they could to make the Excelsiors more effective. Supplies for the planned upgrades could have been prepared while the ship is in transit so that the time for the repair and upgrade time could be matched as closely as possible.

[Mikey]

You're also now talking about using resources that may have been earmarked for other front-line ships under repair, new construction, etc. Also, let's say for our example that an Excelsior is down for a month for repair; and that the Lakota-type refit takes 6 months. Now, you can double-up, of course... but even if you double-up 100%, you're only saving a month of refit time - meaning that Excelsior will be out of action for an additional 5 months.

[Panzer]

Your not reading it right... I said only do what you can during the time it's down for repair, not the full Lakota upgrade (unless it'll be down that long for repair). If you can stick in some new phasers or QT launchers (and power conduits to support them) in the same time as it's already in dock, why not do it? It'll make the ship way more effective when it's gets back to the front, which could mean life or death for the ship and crew.

Yes, it'll use more resources, but have we ever heard of SF being resource limited? Building the Frankenstein-fleet also took resources away from real combat ships, so I don't see resources being a problem in this timeframe.

[Mikey]

Why not? Because now you have two engineering crews working simultaneously on one ship - one for repair, one for upfit - when presumably one of those crews could be repairing another ship. Resources may not be limited in the traditional sense, but every base will only have a finite amount of ship-building (or ship-fixing) materials. The Frankenstein fleet was a bad analogy - that was an (ugly) attempt to push out new ships using a fraction of the resources that "normal" new ships would require.